2Jansing and Co.
1Full Court Press
. >> earlier today, pentagon spokesman, george little, said they had made no plans to its overall defense strategy in the automatic budget cuts approach, the sequester would result in a 9% overall cut the military budget. he spoke with reporters at the pentagon for about 35 minutes. [inaudible conversations] >> qaeda man. before getting to your questions, let me address one of the narratives in recent days regarding sequester set to begin friday unless congress acts. there seems to be a belief in some quarters that when it comes to negative impact the sequester will have on our national defense and military readiness, the department of defense is crying wolf. nothing could be further from the truth. he hurt from dod leaders in the past weeks is not hype. it is the blunt truth. it isn't exaggeration. as the clear eyed assessment of what would have been to the department if we were forced to put this mindless mechanism fully into place. under the guidance of secretary cannot come in the department leaders have been candid and forthright in describing how the military would operate i
Fox News West
and that is what congress needs to do. jenna: we researched the pentagon for a independent staff we haven't got it yet. we have the research department said if we had revisions in afghanistan over the years and we haven't found any. they told the associated press doesn't tell the full story of progress against the taliban. >> fair enough. it is a snapshot, not the movie. once again i think it is pretty important when the administration uses this. panetta said last year that attacks were down in afghanistan in 2012. it doesn't seem to be the case. if we need to get more answers. jenna: we'll look for more information. we continue to cover the story throughout the day here on fox news. peter, thanks for your insight. >> thanks for having me. jon: one town's attempt to go green has some folks seeing red amid complaints wind turbines are making people sick. all this could end up costing taxpayers millions. we're live with that story. >>> plus, what do you get when you cross a rodeo, kids and sheep? the answer is on the way. [ male announcer ] how do you measure happiness? by the armful?
much more important than the defense. $43 billion would be gutted from the pentagon this year. this morning on "jansing & co.," decorated msnbc military analyst jack jacobs said that the cuts will hurt military readyingness. >> in addition to fact -- and there's plenty of fact -- you're also going to cut ammunition, fuel, repair parts for aircraft, flying hours, training time. >> and just moments ago, i had the opportunity to speak with navy secretary ray mabus who said this way of cutting is hurting our military. >> we just cannot run a military lurching from one crisis to another. we've got to have some certainty and i think the president has presented a very balanced plan that will require some compromise. >> joining me is lynn jenkins of kansas. congresswoman, it's great to have you with me. i understand you took part in the conference that was held at the top of the hour and at the same time democrats held their own briefing. congressman chris van hollen made quite an anolg about the cuts. take a listen. >> rearranging the cuts is like rearranging the jobs either way. >> what i
now at capitol hill, art tea talking about the impact of the budget cuts on the pentagon. in the senate they are expected to finally clear the way for confirmation vote to chuck hagel who will inherit this budget mess. janet napolitano, you see her on the right there, also speaking live at the brookings institution. and then just moments ago, we heard from a fired-up john boehner who blames the stalemate on the president and the senate. >> we have moved a bill in the house twice. we should not have a move a third bill before the senate gets off their ass and begins to do something. >> i'm joined by military analyst jack jacobs. good to see you. >> good morning. >> if lawmakers can't make this march 1st deadline, $43 billion or 8% will be slushed from the pentagon budget. they have used words like devastating, dire. are they right? how significant would this be? >> very serious indeed. these are across the board cuts. i mean, there's no intelligence or intelligent decisions made on what is going to be cut. so in addition to fact -- and there's plenty of fact -- you are going to cu
CNN (San Francisco)
, actually the budget in the pentagon is still going to go up. do republicans risk not being seen as credible? >> i think everybody risks not being seen as credible. this more than many of the crises that we've seen congress and the white house deal with. on that particular issue of republicans in defense, i find it fascinating. i spoke with senator cornyn as some of my colleagues up here about that. and what he was saying is that he was trying to try out his message on us about the fact that republicans should in fact not be saying that the sky's going to fall with regard to defense, it has historically been the most important thing when it comes to budget for the republicans because even if these forced cults go into effect, overall defense spending will go up. there's a split among republicans. if you ask john mccain that, he'll say do not touch defense spending, you to do away with forced cuts. there definitely is what this is exposing is a real tug-of-war within the gop over one of the main goals which is getting rid of the deficit and debt and that means reduce spending everywh
pentagon budget set to hit three days later. after months of defense department officials forecasting armageddon and with congress unable and unwilling to prevent the steep spending cuts, he will be entering his role as a crisis. that in the national journal. and to recap, chuck hagel has been confirmed as new defense secretary but the senate voting 58-41. and in our primetime schedule starting at 8:00 eastern time on c-span, debate from the senate floor on chuck hagel's nomination. on c-span2, remarks from attorney general eric holder on reducing gun violence and gun control laws. on c-span3, the senate finance committee holds a hearing on automatic budget cuts and who will -- with the fiscal problems. house republican leaders today said that the president and senate democrats bear responsibility for avoiding $85 billion in automatic spending cuts that begin on friday. house speaker john boehner starts this 10-minute briefing on capitol hill. >> the president, as you are all aware, insisted that he not have to go over the debt ceiling twice and insisted that the backstop for the work
the pentagon possibly to have to reduce or eliminate tricare funding. that's just unconscionable to me. >> host: on the issue of blame that gregory kind of gets into, washington post poll out today asked about a thousand people about where they would assign blame in this sequester issue. 45% assigning it to congressional republicans, 32% to the president, another 13% assigned it equally between the two. about five more minutes of your calls, and we'll be back to the u.s. senate at 2:15 eastern. in california, rodney's on our democrats' line. >> caller: yes. i question the legality of the sequester agreement, because to my understanding sequester is to hold property by judicial authority. the property we're talking about here is the taxpayers' money. since congress has no judicial judicial -- since congress is not a judicial branch of the government with nor do they have judicial power, i don't understand how could they even implement the sequester? >> host: here's a tweet that says the sequester was obama's idea, but it backfired. now let him eat the law he signed. pack to calls. --
pentagon. across-the-board cuts, right? indiscriminate cuts. >> absolutely. >> bill: if it had been $10 trillion, half in the pentagon and half in the programs, the tea parties would have still said bring it on. right? that's their attitude. >> it is entirely possible. this is a group like many throughout the history of congress campaigned against government. ran against the congress. but unlike most in history never found that they had to make the transformation into governing. at some point, you have to be for something. you have to govern. even if you're for decreasing the size of government, you have to find a responsible way to do it. this is not responsible in any way. it cuts the good with the bad the efficient with the inefficient. it is going to cost us more money. when we breach the contracts in defense. so it is not the least bit rational. those that are saying that well, this is not a big deal, it is a small amount. it is a big amount and when you compound the fact that it's taking place now not over full year but over much less than a full year, it is going to really ha
Fetching more results